Question · asked by 1 review
Sealing using sealant materials vs Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE): Lesion progression
- Population
- Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious lesions conventionally considered to need a restoration
- Intervention
- Sealing using sealant materials
- Comparison
- Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE)
- Outcome
- Lesion progression
What each review found
Include earlier review versions| Finding | Effect | Studies | GRADE certainty |
|---|---|---|---|
Sealing using sealant materials vs Selective carious tissue removal (selective excavation, SE) Lesion progression · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and cavitated or dentine carious… · Cavitated lesions, primary dentition Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions (2021) · Cochrane All outcomes | Lesion progression reported narratively: Dias 2018 1/27 sealed vs 1/21 SE at 24 months; Hesse 2014 0/17 sealed vs 0/17 SE at 18 months; not pooled and not GRADE-rated. | 2 studies | GRADE not reported |
Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.
The reviews
| Review | Searched up to | Included studies | AMSTAR 2 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interventions for treating cavitated or dentine carious lesions 2021 · Cochrane All outcomes | 2020-07 | Not listed | Not assessed |
Related questions
The same intervention and outcome, asked in another population or against another comparator.
- Sealing using sealant materials vs Non-selective carious tissue removal and conventional restoration (CR) · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and… · 1 review
- Sealing using sealant materials vs no treatment · Children and/or adults with permanent or primary teeth, vital (sensitive) pulps, and… · 1 review
How reviews are matched to this question
Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.